f13.net

Old school CS to get in game ads, rest of Valve games to follow soon.  Motherfucking cocksuckers (http://csnation.net/articles.php/interview_231/1/).

I am so god damn tired of ads everyplace, product placements, and fucking "sponsor" tie-ins. It was bad enough just in TV, movies, and RL billboards, but now ad companies have realized that people would be looking at the shit constantly, in their face, for hours on end - while their brains are experiencing pleasure and satisfaction. I'm not an expert, but the psychological effects of constantly viewing ads while actively plying a game absolutely have to be different than occasionally seeing a billboard while driving or passively watching TV.

From now on, I will only pay money for games from companies that don't do this shit. Any other company or their subsidiaries engaging sing in-game ads get their shit automatically pirated and distributed for free to anyone I know who wants it. I will not pay for a game and then have them get paid to brainwash me.

I wonder if they won't charge $50 for a new game.

Oh wait, I don't have to wonder, the nature of money tells me otherwise.

Games are taking away from TV. It only makes sense. My advice? Ignore them, I've ignored them on TV for 24 years. I ignore them pretty much everwhere. Of all the things that I find silly, advertisements happens to be the one that least grates on me.

Oh, and lol@brainwashing.

I don't know about you guys, but ads that I see don't automagically make me want to buy...anything. Especially if they are placed out of proper context.

Well, that's the last time I buy a game off Steam.

 :mob:

So, how's D2D compare to it?

I've never had a problem with it. Then again, I've only used it 3 times. And of course, it doesn't have the extra features that Steam has, such as matchmaking and game-specific media browser.

I'll continue to look the other way until they decide to pull more of the same crap they did in BF2142 (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=8433.0).  Adware?  Fine, as long as it stays in game.  Spyware?  Hello, class action lawsuit.

Professor Lurkenstein Explains It All (Clarissa was sick):
1. You cannot sue EA or Valve for collecting information on your system because of the EULA. Either suffer both Spyware and Adware or don't play the game.
2. You couldn't class action a phone book, much less a lawsuit.
3. (http://daveola.com/Pages/Stuff/Consumer_Whore.small.jpg)
4. You already paid money for these games. Now they want more money.
5. The only logical way to persuade them not to do this is by not buying their games.
6. Why did I use a numbered list here?
7. No one needs to learn about opportunities to "Get a bigger pen fifteen today" in the middle of an FPS.

I agree completely.  I've never been covinced to buy anything from a commerci........

Head On!  Apply directly to the forehead!

Head On!  Apply directly to the forehead!

Head On!  Apply directly to the forehead!

I laughed out loud. Classy, Gulp.

I too am wondering if this will affect the price of their games. I doubt it, but worth a shot.

You a lawyer?  If so, I'm already picking a losing fight, but lacking the foresight to determine this I'll forge ahead like a lemming on oceanfront property.  I see some complicating factors, and I love to mention complicating factors, so I shall do so now.

First, you can't sign away rights.  A licence agreement gives the company leeway, but not a get-out-of-lawsuit-free card.  I'm making the assumption we have some consumer protection rights that don't like it when people throw in Spyware or Adware without telling us.

Now, combining with the first point, look at how BF2142 only told you they have included Spyware after you bought the game.  You're informed via a paper insert after you've taken it home and opened it.  Considering you often can't returned opened PC software, I'd say that's fairly good grounds for a class action lawsuit.

But, then again, last I heard EA/DICE wasn't sued for what they did with BF2142, so maybe I'm wrong.  A little google-fu (http://www.petitiononline.com/eabf2142/) does show at 111 people would like to try.

Points 2-7 are non-points.  Should have stopped at #1.  I should know, I am the master of not stopping in time, thus the lemming analogy holds firm.

Listen. You are not a lawyer. Nor are you a rights expert. Allow me to summarize:
You can either Not Play Their Game, thus attempting to correct their behavior by lowering their sales
OR
Play their game and suffer the spyware.

There is no option 3. Cry salty tears of despair.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

Seconded.  I will, however, weep for you KapcomS.

I'm pretty sure he's right.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the two options of KapcomS are the main two options for the everyman in the vast majority of situations.

However, when people are bundling spyware with software and not informing the user until after it's too late to take it back, they've crossed a line that, if legal litigation does not yet exist to protect the user from this activity, it will.

Simply giving in and crying salty tears of despair works, I suppose, if you've surrendered any ideas of demanding you have rights at all.  I've yet to cross that line, but dutifully respect the philosophy of those who have.

He's basically right, and you're basically wrong -- trying to predict what may happen in the future is equally risky.  I suggest backing out now while you can.

See, now I've a guy who I like to think I'm on pretty good terms and a lawyer besides telling me to back down and just accept that spyware is something we can't fight.

But, well, it's happening anyway. (http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2005/11/spyware_litigat.htm)

That's not what I was saying.  I was really just trying to save you some time and effort.

Now that's a point we agree on.  Trying to convince the other guy of anything on a message board is little more than a giant time sink.  Especially when the other guy is somebody who keeps this link handy.

You've beaten me at apathy.  Congratulations.

It's not apathy. It's reality.

And don't play the angle your playing. You've made a lifestyle out of trying to convince people on the internet of whatever.

Yes, any desire on my part to convince people on the Internet of anything is an unhealthy lifestyle I'm attempting to curb lately.

However, if I do this to you:
It is apathy, ignoring reality, or at least another person's interpretation thereof.  That's what I was criticizing in my last message, not the bit where he outlines the two options.

Hey, can we add that smiley to our menu?

No, it's purely an argumentative emoticon. What Geldon actually said - and I hate getting into arguments about semantics when he doesn't understand half the shit that comes out of his mouth is the following (and it's what got me pissed):


There's nothing apathetic about what the new guy said (sup KapcomS), it was just reality. Really, that emoticon should be reserved for use against Geldon... Is there anyone else who uses so many words to say so little? Anyone?

I can think of a few, but they don't post here anymore.

Here's a question...will the ads prevent you from spraying them?

People spray ads? All I ever got to see were vaginas.

I meant like spraying over them;  but you bring up a good point, most ads will be better than the average CS spray.

One can probably spray them like any other surface, provided they're located where the player could reach them.  It probably wouldn't achieve much though, as it'd probably get the players to pay more attention to the ads than they would otherwise.

I would guess they'll be unsprayable. I have family in the advertising business. Ad clients are extremely picky about positioning, size and presentation of their ads, and they don't take well to potential defacement. They won't be sprayable largely because this makes it possible for players to circumvent the point of the ad via overwriting part of the intended message.

For those who have BF2142, SWAT4 or any other ad-enabled game - are the ads covered by the equivalent of sprays? What about explosion marks?

Well, if I ever decided to stop boycotting Steam, this just gives me another reason to.  Shit, all these fucking programs that want live on my machine should be paying me rent.

If I remember correctly bullet holes and other weapon markings would show on top of the ads in PlanetSide but it took some effort to cover up an entire ad.

Personally I worry less about in game ads than between game ads.

European TV time is now 18% advertising. It is only that low because regulation prevents it going higher.

US TV time is approaching 30% advertising.

When valve feel they can get away with an advert between each CS rubber, then I'll get nervous.

____________

Also, regarding spyware, so long as any spyware is limited to things you tell the steam application (such as when you play the game, how much you play the game, and the hardware survey if you choose to press that button), I'd be surprised if there is much you can do. Valve isn't even likely to share this data, they'll just be using it to direct ads according to profiles agreed with advertisers.

If steam starts rooting around in your internet logs there might be an outside chance you can do something about it, though security features on non-Microsoft browsers are more likely to provide you with an opportunity than a lawyer is.

Then you might as well only buy games from small indie companies, because the big ones who have to use publishers, they are all going to be using this shit. It's here to stay.

As for what can you do about spyware/adware in games, there is one other option besides the 2 given.

3) Pay a lawyer to tell you how much of a retard you are for paying a lawyer to take up a case that will never reach court or if it does reach court, will be laughed out.

Ads are not harmful according to the law. The only reason shit like Sony's rootkits and such got any kind of traction is that they were BLATANTLY harmful to the machine (or could be) and assinine to the extreme. Regular ads in BF2142? They suck, but they aren't harmful.

Look at it this way. The ads aren't paying to make your games less expensive. They aren't paying to fund more development. They are paying to make more profit for the publisher, which hopefully makes more profit for the developer but I don't count that as a given. They are paying to keep the video game industry from choking on its own dick, since they've pretty much fucked up the economic model of video games at the retail level so that ONLY hits are profitable and only within the first 2 weeks of sales. In short, you are paying the cost for short-sighted stupidity on the part of the PC video game industry (and the consoles to a certain extent). ENJOY, BITCHES!

I'm still waiting on Ads showing up on music CDs.   I think we'd have them by now if MP3's hadn't caught-on.  The recording industry is shortsighted, but they're not so short sighted they didn't realize people would be stealing music with even more frequency should that happen.

Why would they need them? They have free promotionals with radio stations, and the music publishers/distributors are already making hand over fist (not the artists of course, buncha dirty-smelling hippies) on CD's as they are. No, they just pressure artists to sell the music to ad agencies for use in commercials and it amounts to the same thing without having to alter their current process in a non-PR friendly way.

Told you so! Now not only you have no choice but play CS with adds thanks to Steam being forced on all of us, you also get less use out of something you paid for. I wonder if you can sue Valve for sneaking adds into CS after release.

Well welcome to the future, cocksuckers. I hope buying BF2140 was worth 'punch the monkey' future.

Its a boiling frog - if most people succeed at ignoring adds they are redesigned to be more intrusive, where majority are unable to ignore them and nobody gives a fuck that it gives epileptic seizures and/or distracting. 

Would hard-coded minimal load time and unnecessary loading breaks every few times an hour will make you reconsider?

Three Penns in a row. I bet this is what Teller's nightmares look like.

Actually, I think that's what Teller's reality looks like as well.

Installing spyware without telling the user that you will be installing it as you install another application is probably is illegal - I'm sure that there is plenty of vaguely worded anti-hacker legislation out there that a smart lawyer could use to fight such an action.

Of course, someone has to pay a smart lawyer to find said provision(s), then keep paying them as the video games industry inevitably plays the waiting game and, in the end, the judge would rule that provided that the application tells you it will be installing spyware and you agree to it, then everything is fine.

Ads in games won't be an issue after they become common place. People will ignore them, culturejam them or watch them, the same as they do with all advertising currently.

And you will love the convenience of being able to see Nvidia's latest video card specs while you have downtime between CS rounds. You will, and you know it.

I made a choice to not watch TV due to adds, I regularly purchase (yes, purchase, not pirate) TV shows to watch with my S.O. I don't like wasting up to 30% of my leisure time on watching adds. If you think that advertisement in games will be thematically appropriate, will not interfere with your games and will not negatively affect your gaming experience - well just look at TV. Mandatory load times, commercial pauses, vision field pollution and boosts/bonuses for watching adds are in the near future. There is no low too low when its corporate marketing, trust me I know first hand. Lets hope there will be people willing to block/stop them.

I'm going to stick with options 4 and 5

4) Pirate the shit. Fuck em. Pirate what I want and use cracked exes, whatever for the online parts. It's been 10 years now and they still can't keep myg0t doing anything they want to anything HL related at any time they want, and in whatever way they want to do it.

5) Buy an imported Australian copy, though that would only be an absolute last resort in the event that any game comapany existing is able to keep deviance, reloaded, or fairlight from having a cracked ISO up a week before a title goes retail. So far none of them have, ever.

As far as funding further development, get the fuck out of here. Paaaaa-lease. This is going to fund cocaine-fueled hookers for a handful of execs at the expense of my quality of life. 0% of this is going to be seen in the trenches, no matter what company it is. If this is the future of the gaming industry, fuck it in it's ass.

I think I will do the same, chances are adds will be removed from hacked version. Right now I purchase *all* my games but this will quickly change. Only way you can stop this shit is by not buying it, too bad most of the passive maggots here are all too willing to take it up the ass instead of making a stand.

I imagine some people truely will not care about the adverts. I don't know about myself, because I have not yet played a game that made use of these technologies.

I've said elsewhere that I don't think it's a bad idea for free games (like AO). Putting them in games that customers already pay for though is, for lack of a better word, evil.

The TV comparisons are bogus.

If you want to use TV advertising examples, then HBO is more to the point. Would you like ads for a television service you're actually paying for?

But I pay for cable and most channels have ads. I wouldn't watch much tv if it weren't for the DVR, that saved tv imo. If the Phillips tech for prohibiting fast forward through commercials ever sees the mainstream, well...that's the end of tv.

I just won't buy games with ads. I'd like to play BF2142, but I won't. I won't pirate them, either. I feel it's a companies right to put ads in their game, that doesn't somehow make it ok to steal their software. If ingame ads becomes mainstream, well...that's the end of gaming.

Really...I'm ok with both scenarios. I like tv and I like games, but I have plenty to do without them. If capitalists make them unpalatable for me, I'll just have more time for playing guitar, reading, and hiking. Maybe take up skiing or something.

You should really taking up Skiing anyway.

The aim of these ads isn’t to make you click through and buy right now. Their aim is to shift the probability of you buying in the future. And that works. If you don’t believe this, you are simply in denial. These ads work because:

1) People can’t consciously access all the factors that went into a buying decision.

2) 80% free will feels like 100% free will. You have no brain mechanism for detecting the missing 20%.

3) You can’t compare your decision as it would have been before the ad, to your decision after the ad, if the probability shift was subconscious.

4) Advertising agencies can however compare populations that have been exposed to an ad to ones that haven’t. These comparisons show that ads, on average, work.

5) Big corporations pay out a lot for advertising because can be shown to work. Because it only shifts probabilities, you can’t say what the effect of a particular ad on a particular person is though.


About the only way not to have ads effect you is not to watch the ads. If you think “ignoring” the ads is working, you are just kidding yourself. Or maybe you just are a weird statistical anomaly, but I doubt it.

It is the future.

As for funding development, that money is not actually funding real development, but it IS funding those cocaine-fueled hookers without which no executives would fund development. Or to put it most businesslike, it's making it more profitable for suits to make games, and thus, they make more games. The people who put ads in games like 2142 DO NOT FUCKING CARE ABOUT THE GAME. Period. They don't give a fuck about you, your games, your hobbies, your hopes and dreams. They could care less if you are plugged into a machine barely kept alive with hummingbird syrup so long as money keeps coming out of your wallets and into their balance sheets. They could care less if the game has PVP, PVE, multiplayer, co-op or is nothing more than numbers going up and down the screen hypnotically.

But without that extra cheddar, they won't fund development. Whether or not that's a good thing depends on how much you care about games from big publishers.

Sorry, can't really think of anything I have bought....I'll say Ever, just because I saw an TV ad or something for it.

Though I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. Just seeing an ad may not make me more likely to buy something, but I may or may not check into whatever they're trying to sell. But all the same, I may just see it on a shelf or something, and do the same thing. Heck, some ads may make me inclined to ignore the product, just out of spite.


This is somewhat beside the point, as I don't really shop. At all. And when I do, I already know what I am looking for.

How?

How what?

He's asking how do you already know what you're looking for.

I am a marketing person's worst nightmare.  All an ad does for me, is that when I decide I need a product(basically, anything other than food/clothes, that is more than $20-$30), it gets added to the research list.  I google, read forums, look at purchaser reviews online, compare feature lists of competitors, etc.  By the time I actually buy something, I probably know more about it than most of the people writing its marketting copy.  In the end, all seeing an ad does is get you added to a list you would probably be on anyway if you have any marketshare whatsoever.

My spouse also does this.  Is it possible to be addicted to web research?

My name is Nazrat.  I am addicted to web research.  [everyone] Hi, Nazrat [/everyone]

My wife laughs at my habits on this front also.  I will have read most major reviews of any product including, but not limited to, Consumer Report website, CNET, Tom's Hardware, etc.  She thinks it is funny until she has a question.  Then, she likes it when I can use my "advanced" Google-fu to pull up one of the 200 articles on the subject.  When we travel, I have Mapquest or Google map directions even if it is a trip to my childhood home. 

Marketing causes inquiry.  I think that is the actual result in most instances and may, in fact, be the intended result.  That stupid IPod Shuffle commercial causes most people to ask, WTF?  Most commercials are like that now.  I play a game with my 6 year old son in which I get him to guess what they are trying to sell you from a commercial.  It is harder than you think.   

Ingame ads will be treated like guild recruiting spam in WOW.  It is there.  We all notice it for a split second.  We move on.  I am not going to stop and stare a Coke ad because it is in the next edition of HL2.  I am pretty familiar with Coke's products by now.

How about if they force you to watch Coke adds for 3 minutes every time new map/level loads, even if your machine is capable of loading it in 20 seconds? How about introducing unnecessary loading, just to make sure you watch adds? How about turning health packs into McD hamburgers? How about wasting 30% of your time forcing you to watch adds, all while you pay for the privilege?

I don't go out with at least an idea of what I am shopping for. I don't really do "impulse purchases."

For food/clothes, I don't need ads for that. I just go into the store, see if they have anything I like, purchase if I feel like it, and go home. For stuff like games, if it's a game I would be interested in, I already know about it before I see any ads for it.

And really, I don't shop much, if at all. I can't remember the last time I went "shopping." Also, I too am addicted to web research, so if I am in the market for...lets say an MP3 player, if the product is decent, I'll probably be glancing through some material about it anyway. Heck, the only MP3 players I see ads for at iPods, and I refuse to buy that overpriced stuff.

I just don't see how ads influence me, personally.

My husband does this.  I ask him which one I should buy.  If he doesn't know, I'd probably ask the F13 community, because geeks are good at stuff like that (not me, though, I'm enamored by geekgadgets but not informed about them).

I'd cancel my sub for adding to loading times, or unnecessary loading times or obnoxious advertising.

Unobtrusive advertising, though - I'm with Schild, I ignore it.

That's right, fight the machine buddy, we're laughing with you, secretly applauding your ability to take a major stand and throw a fit over the little stuff so the rest of us don't have to. The rest of us will quietly suffer our hedonism.

If the ad turns players / consumers away from the product, then the product fails. You're assuming here that marketers will necessarily do everything in their power to screw-up your experience. They don't. They want you to buy the product, and making you angry is the worst way of doing that (unless it's for an anger management class, I guess).

Some might mess you around. When it is shown that such tactics won't work, then they will stopped being used.

TV is for the masses, so it has been used to throw messages broadly.

Online game advertising could be used to target people a lot more precisely. Of course, no-one really wants to give up that level of personal information to make such targetting possible, but if Steam advertises all-Steam related information / game-related info, then it is more likely to be relevant to you (assuming you are using Steam for this example).

Online advertising won't work if it tries to just dump TV-style ads onto your home PC.

At it's most basic level, ads promote awareness. That's all. They won't ever really make you get up and buy the product, but they (hopefully) make you know that a product exists and then, perhaps, how it would fit into your life.

There are other channels of learning about products, but advertising is still a pretty strong way of doing it. If done well, of course.

There is a lot can be said on how advertising works, but a lot of visual adds work by trying to form or influence positive associations in your mind. Ideally ads want to convince you that successful, beautiful, popular and happy people use 'the product' or that product will make you safer, happier or more attractive to the opposite sex. Humans are pack animals and social imitation is part of what we are - monkey sees monkey does, even if it is just fake commercial trying to convince you that buying useless shit will make you somehow better. More you see it more you believe it and you can't entirely help it even if you are aware of what is going on. At some point associations are formed (and it is not necessary conscious process) and observational bias kicks in, so you are a lot more likely to see said traits in 'the product' or use of thereof.

Consider following – how many people purchase any given car after researching and picking it as a best fit against set of criteria versus people that buy cars that ‘fit their personality’ (associated with desirable traits) ?


There are information commercials out there but they are minority and mostly can be found on the radio where you can’t tap into visual.

/rant

ZOMG, they use psychology to sell things!  Must protect myself...

Wait, you're a mole for the tinfoil lobby, right?

No, I used to work in marketing and have extensive background in psychology.

So yes, I'm a bomb diffusal guy running at a top speed with wet spot on my pants. We are all fucked, but you just might not know it yet.